IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jijfss/v12y2024i2p33-d1366493.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Crowdfunding versus Traditional Banking: Alternative or Complementary Systems for Financing Projects in Portugal?

Author

Listed:
  • Bruno Torres

    (NECE-UBI, Research Centre for Business Sciences, Department of Management and Economics, University of Beira Interior, 6201-001 Covilhã, Portugal)

  • Zélia Serrasqueiro

    (Department of Management and Economics—CEFAGE-UBI, University of Beira Interior, 6201-001 Covilhã, Portugal)

  • Márcio Oliveira

    (NECE-Research Center in Business Sciences, University of Beira Interior, 6201-001 Covilhã, Portugal
    School of Education and Social Sciences, Polytechnic of Leiria, 2411-901 Leiria, Portugal)

Abstract

In an era where crowdfunding in Portugal is garnering increased public attention, exemplified by notable campaigns like the recent funding of the nurses’ strike, we explore its potential as an alternative financial source to traditional banking. Through a comprehensive case study, we delve into pertinent issues, encompassing European legislation, market dynamics, and a survey disseminated to representatives of the four prominent Portuguese crowdfunding platforms. Comprising forty-one questions across four categories, the survey extracts insights on platform details, company/project information, investor perspectives, and the financing process, along with an evaluation of platform advantages/disadvantages vis-à-vis traditional banking. Despite heightened visibility, crowdfunding remains relatively unfamiliar to the broader public, yet it diverges from banking not as a substitute but as a complementary financial mechanism. Emphasizing accessibility, process agility, and reduced bureaucracy, crowdfunding serves as a means of swiftly gaining recognition for a company or project while tapping into a broad audience. Rather than competition, it offers supplementary support, facilitating the identification and validation of investment opportunities and concepts. Moreover, it streamlines subsequent interactions with banks and investors, enhancing confidence in a project’s viability. In essence, crowdfunding emerges not as an alternative but a strategic complement, enriching the financial landscape with its unique attributes.

Suggested Citation

  • Bruno Torres & Zélia Serrasqueiro & Márcio Oliveira, 2024. "Crowdfunding versus Traditional Banking: Alternative or Complementary Systems for Financing Projects in Portugal?," IJFS, MDPI, vol. 12(2), pages 1-16, March.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jijfss:v:12:y:2024:i:2:p:33-:d:1366493
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2227-7072/12/2/33/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2227-7072/12/2/33/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Ajay Agrawal & Christian Catalini & Avi Goldfarb, 2015. "Crowdfunding: Geography, Social Networks, and the Timing of Investment Decisions," Journal of Economics & Management Strategy, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 24(2), pages 253-274, June.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Douglas Cumming & Lars Hornuf & Moein Karami & Denis Schweizer, 2023. "Disentangling Crowdfunding from Fraudfunding," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 182(4), pages 1103-1128, February.
    2. Majid Ahmadi & Nathan Durst & Jeff Lachman & John A. List & Mason List & Noah List & Atom T. Vayalinkal, 2022. "Nothing Propinks Like Propinquity: Using Machine Learning to Estimate the Effects of Spatial Proximity in the Major League Baseball Draft," NBER Working Papers 30786, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    3. Goran Calic & Moren Lévesque & Anton Shevchenko, 2024. "On why women-owned businesses take more time to secure microloans," Small Business Economics, Springer, vol. 63(3), pages 917-938, October.
    4. Chul Kim & P. K. Kannan & Michael Trusov & Andrea Ordanini, 2020. "Modeling Dynamics in Crowdfunding," Marketing Science, INFORMS, vol. 39(2), pages 339-365, March.
    5. Helen Bollaert & Gaël Leboeuf & Armin Schwienbacher, 2020. "The narcissism of crowdfunding entrepreneurs," Small Business Economics, Springer, vol. 55(1), pages 57-76, June.
    6. Appio, Francesco Paolo & Leone, Daniele & Platania, Federico & Schiavone, Francesco, 2020. "Why are rewards not delivered on time in rewards-based crowdfunding campaigns? An empirical exploration," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 157(C).
    7. Battaglia, Francesca & Regoli, Andrea & Agnese, Paolo, 2022. "Do local innovation systems promote successful equity crowdfunding campaigns? Evidence from Italy," Finance Research Letters, Elsevier, vol. 48(C).
    8. Yuho Chung & Yiwei Li & Jianmin Jia, 2021. "Exploring embeddedness, centrality, and social influence on backer behavior: the role of backer networks in crowdfunding," Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, Springer, vol. 49(5), pages 925-946, September.
    9. Chan, C.S. Richard & Parhankangas, Annaleena & Sahaym, Arvin & Oo, Pyayt, 2020. "Bellwether and the herd? Unpacking the u-shaped relationship between prior funding and subsequent contributions in reward-based crowdfunding," Journal of Business Venturing, Elsevier, vol. 35(2).
    10. Rob Gleasure & Kieran Conboy & Lorraine Morgan, 2019. "Talking Up a Storm: How Backers Use Public Discourse to Exert Control in Crowdfunded Systems Development Projects," Information Systems Research, INFORMS, vol. 30(2), pages 447-465, June.
    11. Jung, Eunjun & Lee, Changjun & Hwang, Junseok, 2022. "Effective strategies to attract crowdfunding investment based on the novelty of business ideas," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 178(C).
    12. Gilles Chemla & Katrin Tinn, 2020. "Learning Through Crowdfunding," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 66(5), pages 1783-1801, May.
    13. Daniel Blaseg & Christian Schulze & Bernd Skiera, 2020. "Consumer Protection on Kickstarter," Marketing Science, INFORMS, vol. 39(1), pages 211-233, January.
    14. Zaggl, Michael A. & Block, Joern, 2019. "Do small funding amounts lead to reverse herding? A field experiment in reward-based crowdfunding," Journal of Business Venturing Insights, Elsevier, vol. 12(C).
    15. Goethner, Maximilian & Hornuf, Lars & Regner, Tobias, 2021. "Protecting investors in equity crowdfunding: An empirical analysis of the small investor protection act," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 162(C).
    16. Lars Hornuf & Matthias Schmitt & Eliza Stenzhorn, 2017. "Equity Crowdfunding in Germany and the UK: Follow-up Funding and Firm Failure," CESifo Working Paper Series 6642, CESifo.
    17. Zunino, Diego & van Praag, Mirjam C. & Dushnitsky, Gary, 2017. "Badge of Honor or Scarlet Letter? Unpacking Investors' Judgment of Entrepreneurs' Past Failure," IZA Discussion Papers 11017, Institute of Labor Economics (IZA).
    18. Yan Lin & Wai Fong Boh, 2020. "How different Are crowdfunders? Examining archetypes of crowdfunders," Journal of the Association for Information Science & Technology, Association for Information Science & Technology, vol. 71(11), pages 1357-1370, November.
    19. Sylvain Dejean, 2019. "The role of distance and social networks in the geography of crowdfunding: evidence from France," Working Papers hal-01645147, HAL.
    20. Wang, Xiaoting & Hou, Siyuan & Kyaw, Khine & Xue, Xupeng & Liu, Xueqin, 2023. "Exploring the determinants of Fintech Credit: A comprehensive analysis," Economic Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 126(C).

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:gam:jijfss:v:12:y:2024:i:2:p:33-:d:1366493. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: MDPI Indexing Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.